Hi Platt, David L. and all,
PLATT
> I suppose it was to be expected that the Christmas season would encourage
> some contributors to emphasize "caring" as the top moral principle
although
> that lofty position is hardly supported by the Metaphysics of Quality.
>
> In fact, the MoQ firmly attaches the Judeo-Christian ideals of caring,
love
> they neighbor, do unto others, etc. to the social level.
Platt, I think we may be in for a flame war that I have little stomach for.
I feel that you miss the full implications of my "caring" statements - maybe
I need to spell it out.
Caring isn't a social pattern. It comes BEFORE the slicing of patterns into
layers. In my post alluded to Pirsig's discussion of craftsmenship in ZAMM.
Those are examples of caring about material things. IMO the artist has to
care about his work - including the material aspects. The message of ZAMM
was that this is a part of science and technology too. The "detached
objectivity" of science doesn't really fit with the practical aspects of
research. My personal experience of laboratory work is that a tremendous
amount of care and caring has to go into it, or its a waste of time. The
"looking out" aspect which I put in the subject header refers to the need
for constant vigilence and openness to anything new that may unexpectedly
turn up.
I was impressed by DAVID LIND's piece about carefully watching the audience
as an acting exercise. This is a wonderful example of caring and looking
out. The caring is a prerequisite - without it the actor isn't going to see
anything.
>Further, these ideals have been around for at least 2000 years, placing
them in the static quality
>category.
Every "ideal" is a static ... just as soon as you try and define it.
Furthermore, the fact that a value is evident 2000 years, or even 50,000
years ago says to me that it is a "natural" part of humanity. I'm much more
wary of new fangled "values" that cropped up in our own lifetime.
I'm reminded of the following Pirsig quote:
>
> "Static morality is full of heroes and villains, loves and hatreds,
carrots and
> sticks. Its values don't change by themselves. Unless they are altered by
> Dynamic Quality they say the same thing year after year. Sometimes they
> say it more loudly, sometimes more softly, but the message is always the
> same." (Lila, Chap. 9)
Pirsig is talking about a moral system where the rules are applied by the
book, where the caring is restricted to the rules themselves. Morality
becomes a simple issue of executing murderers, beheading adulterers and
performing amputations on thieves.
PLATT:
> By MoQ standards the message of "caring" is as fine an example of static
> morality as you're likely to find. Nor has caring always been the beacon
of
> hope for humanity that some attribute to it. After all, caring for the
souls of
> nonbelievers was the excuse for the tortures of the Inquisition, and
caring for
> the purity of the human race was the rationale for Nazi genocide. Caring
can
> cut many ways. (The Russians currently care a lot about not losing
> Chechnya in the name of preserving the Russian "union.")
Platt is right about the Russians and the Nazis. The Nazis did indeed care
about what they were doing - in fact the "race science" they created is a
wonderful example of a "new fangled" set of values (see above) that did
immense damage and then disappeared.
>
> I don't see where Pirsig gives caring any more importance than other
values
> that maintain the social order. In the MoQ, the intellect is morally above
> social quality. (Pirsig would approve the choosing of Albert Einstein as
> Person of the Century over Mother Theresa.)
Einstein cared deeply about his work - he is also an impressive beacon of
morality (dozens of quotes).
Mother Therease cared deeply about different things.
> Compassion, sensitivity, loving-kindness -- these are not words in the
> vocabulary of the MoQ. It seems to me that if they were vital in the big
MoQ
> scheme of things, Pirsig would have used them a lot more often.
>
I assume that Pirsig avoided certain words to avoid misunderstandings.
Actually, Platt's list is interesting; look at that middle word SENSITIVITY.
Platt regards that as a social value - go tell that to a technician or
scientist!!!!!
Jonathan
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:17 BST